Re: Discovering new relationships

On 3 mar, 01:14, paul c <toledobythe..._at_oohay.ac> wrote: <<I don't think an RT
implementation can distinguish between a domain that stands for measurements and one that stands for kinds of things such as rice>> Agreed.

<< My attitude is that talking about kinds of data is verging on the mystical
(if we are not talking about operators that apply to only certain "kinds" of data). >>
While building a system once in data mining perspective, I designed a database with the help of a team of statisticians. They brought to my attention the fundamental aspects of differences between discrete variables and continuous variables and the differences in computing treatment such differences imply. In a fundamental design perspective, this did not have any impact on the primary operators used but rather helped me guide better the design process...Tere were some moment I seriously wished some additional operators would exists: what about an operator that would allow for instance to return the product between cardinalities? That would be useful in calculations? I find that hardly *mystical*...So I have thought about a classification of operators: some operators called primary (intersect, union, etc...) that would be relevant mainly for relation level operations and some I would call secondary that would be attribute based such as.join

My two cents in exploring new territories...

My two cents Received on Sat Mar 03 2007 - 15:17:02 CET